View Single Post
Old 10-05-2012, 12:31 PM   #79
Ninjalawyer
Guru
Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Ninjalawyer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Ninjalawyer's Avatar
 
Posts: 816
Karma: 18450000
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Canada
Device: Kobo Touch, Nexus 7 (2013)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
I don't know whether you're being deliberately obtuse, or I'm having particular difficulty in getting my point across. I suspect the former, but just in case it is the latter, let me have one more go.

1. Existing copyright law gives an acceptable level of protection for works. We do not need longer copyright terms, further restrictions on what people can and can't legally do with copyrighted works, etc. The current law is fine in that regard.

2. There is no good method for content creators to prosecute people who infringe their rights. The only recourse is civil prosecution. This is extremely expensive for both the rights holder and the offender. We need a low-cost, quick, system to settle these cases which doesn't result in ruinous costs for both sides.

If you still don't understand what I'm trying to say, then I'm not going to waste my time and yours by explaining further.
I understand what you're trying to say, that you want the barrier to copyright enforcement to be lower. However, I also understand that the restrictiveness of a law is tied to how easily rights can be enforced. Marginal claims under a law with lower barriers to litigation get filtered out, resulting in more enforcement and a greater drag on the system.

While what you want will make it easier to enforce your rights, the overall effect is a greater drag on the system in the form of more frivolous lawsuits that would otherwise be filtered out and more restrictions, even if they're obtained from the backdoor rather than the front door.

I also have to wonder how easy it would have to be for you to even bother going after file sharers personally. And I wonder what standards of evidence you think are appropriate. Much of your complaint no doubt relates more to the high barrier of proof you need (even when its a balance of probabilities in the civil system) than how hard launching a claim is.

You don't seem to want a system to make it easier for you to enforce your rights, you want some other entity to do it for you, and that requires a change in the law and more restrictions on internet users.
Ninjalawyer is offline   Reply With Quote